coreboot April 2016

coreboot@coreboot.org

49 participants
97 discussions

Lenovo T410 Coreboot
by A. Veek 14 Dec '18

14 Dec '18

2 1

Re: [coreboot] No VGA output on e350m1 after flashing. what to do?
by Reiner Luett 12 Sep '17

12 Sep '17

Hi! On 30.06.2013 19:28, Christian Weinz wrote: > Maybe I didn't include the VGA option in the make menuconfig process. > How can I solve this problem? You need to add the VGA Option ROM (VGA BIOS -> Add VGA BIOS image). I've extracted it from the UEFI, but you also could use these: http://www.coreboot.org/index.php?title=ASRock_E350M1&oldid=11114 at the end of the page or you also may be able to use the default AMD fam14 (Persimmon) vbios. You will need to agree to the click through: http://wwwd.amd.com/support/vbioslic.nsf/userverify?openform http://www.coreboot.org/AMD_DB-FT1_PERSIMMON It's a pity, that bios_extract didn't work for now. You could use the AMI Aptio EFI MMTool with wine: http://win-lite.de/benutzer/fernando/BIOS-Tools/AMI_Aptio_EFI_MMTool_v4.50.… You need to extract OntarioEFIVbios with PCI ID 1002,9802 as Option ROM. Regards, Reiner --

5 6

ASUS KCMA-D8 workstation board port offer
by Timothy Pearson 20 Jan '17

20 Jan '17

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 All, After reviewing some of the comments on the ASUS KGPE-D16 being essentially too large of a system and too expensive for many people, and the fact that modern, blob-free systems are not really available in the mid-range arena, Raptor Engineering would like to offer to create a native initalization blob-free port for the ASUS KCMA-D8, which is essentially the KGPE-D16's ATX-compatible "little brother". We would be asking $15,000 for the port, including upstreaming to the master coreboot tree. We already have extensive experience with these Family 10h/15h boards, and would be able to create a port of similar quality to the existing KGPE-D16 source in terms of both code quality and overall functionality. If this is something you might be interested in please let me know. We are able to accept multiple payments from various sources for the same project (within limits), so if this is something your local Linux groups or similar might be interested in we should be able to keep the cost on any one individual or organization to a reasonable level. Thank you for your consideration, - -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) http://www.raptorengineeringinc.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWQROpAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbR2cH/3FTqGFH+cU/HVrBUPcoKjii h9OC7SGeXdyoLZvob/YayG+g47Yppkg2um4pAC7dmGl/OXtkGh13hlsrQ8BNiYcz g0kQUdNKYh9dmBC3YnlxU6a7psh473TdyuLILrl7/8WgI8DZnRtjy62Oo5k6XAKW jfYb/bGC8I3tArYrgQDmFxz2dOejuTZit56I+mbWNtvbuQov2BDmrPPMLRuEvG3M QHCAo/Pjaajzl4rmtrgu0GHcxHsgAnJcnrcPkFYeSDKt7QxSTNOB6NqhcnYdh1SY RiA5Z/3enuDs+XNhS+6qMeKOcrEuf+Ccs7sGsgq5tWm20JA+bBoByvrXhHqVUxU= =DKfR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

7 16

Re: [coreboot] Where is the first instrucion?
by Alex G. 25 Jul '16

25 Jul '16

On 01/10/2016 10:23 AM, ron minnich wrote: > One thing I think you'd enjoy doing is building the qemu target, setting > up qemu with gdb, and just watching what happens, instruction by > instruction, as the system boots. One exercise I liked doing was to rewrite the entire boot flow, from reset vector to protected mode entry. Tested on qemu, put it on hardware, nothing burned. Alex > ron > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 3:28 AM Rafael Machado > <rafaelrodrigues.machado(a)gmail.com > <mailto:rafaelrodrigues.machado@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi Peter and Rudolf. > Thanks for the answers and tips. They are realy helpfull ! > I'll take a look. > > Rafael R. Machado > > > Em Sáb, 9 de jan de 2016 17:19, Rudolf Marek <r.marek(a)assembler.cz > <mailto:r.marek@assembler.cz>> escreveu: > > Hi, > > I guess your question is more general than the coreboot related > right? > > If you have a firmware image dump of the flash (not the file you > download from > board vendor) then yes, first location to be executed is the > instruction located > 16 bytes before end of the image. > > In coreboot see in build/ bootblock_inc.S which also has > reset16.inc and > entry16.inc which is a real start. Consult the Intel or AMD > manual to see the > CPU state after reset. The CPU starts in real mode, but CS base > is shifted to > last 64KB before end of 4GB address space. In general your CPU > starts in > compatible mode with 8086 manufactured in 1978. > > Thanks > Rudolf > > -- > coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org > <mailto:coreboot@coreboot.org> > http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot > > >

2 1

[GSOC 2016] Coreboot panic room
by Antonello Dettori 16 May '16

16 May '16

Hello everyone, I am currently a computing student at the University of Abertay in Scotland and I would like to take part in this year GSOC. The proposal that I want to submit concerns the coreboot panic room idea since it looks like something that could really benefit the project as a whole and also because it seems like a really interesting technical challenge. I already digged through the blog and the mail exchanges of the previous developer working on this, Tadas Slotkus, and took a look at the patches that he wrote so I already have a general understanding of their aim. I would like to concentrate most of my efforts towards improving and upstreaming the previous efforts, implementing a way to easily access the recovery mode when needed and further the integration between coreboot, serialICE and flashrom for this use-case. Regarding the existing patches I would like to know if they would need to stay romc-compatible or should the scope be limited to CAR boards? Any suggestions on how to tackle this project or GSOC in general? Thanks in advance.

2 1

Re: [coreboot] coreboot 4.4 release coming soon
by Paul Kocialkowski 01 May '16

01 May '16

Here is a status report for the chromebooks I'm using: * veyron_speedy Boots fine with today's HEAD on a standard use case. However, my particular use case requires https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/14472/ which is trivial. * nyan_big Building with CHROMEOS requires https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/14474/ otherwise it hangs at bootblock. Merging the libpayload config before the release would also be nice: https://rev iew.coreboot.org/#/c/14472/ With those patches applied, the display is mangled on depthcharge as seen on: ht tp://download.paulk.fr/coreboot/nyan_big/nyan_big-display.jpg A boot log is attached to this email. It would be useful if someone else could try and let me know whether they can duplicate the issue. I'm unsure the issue comes from coreboot, depthcharge or my modifications to depthcharge and vboot. The repositories I'm using are: http://git.code.paulk.fr/gitweb/?p=coreboot.git;a=summary http://git.code.paulk.fr/gitweb/?p=depthcharge.git;a=summary http://git.code.paulk.fr/gitweb/?p=vboot.git;a=summary with branch libreboot-next Cheers, -- Paul Kocialkowski, low-level free software developer on embedded devices Website: https://www.paulk.fr/ Coding blog: https://code.paulk.fr/ Git repositories: https://git.paulk.fr/ https://git.code.paulk.fr/

1 1

Lenovo X200 running Coreboot drains 3-4W more power than with Vendor BIOS
by Daniel Kulesz 01 May '16

01 May '16

Hi, I was wondering why my Lenovo X200 had such a short battery lifetime when running Libreboot/Coreboot, so I did a few measurements using the following hardware configuration: X200 with P8700 CPU 8GB RAM LED Display (yes, one of the rare ones) OCZ Trion SSD (unused, just idling) Wifi and WWAN removed Battery removed Ubuntu MATE 16.04 Live running from an USB thumb drive No tweaking with powertop or such I kept this configuration unchanged except for the BIOS and waited 5 minutes after booting, so the system could settle. Then I measured power consumption both at full brightness and at minimum brightness using a conventional power meter (EKM 365) which was plugged between the AC adapter and the power socket in the wall. I obtained the following numbers: Vendor BIOS: 7,5W (lowest) to 10W (highest) Libreboot 20150518 (using the precompiled binary binary): 13,3W (lowest) to 16,1W (highest) Latest Coreboot, config attached (80a3df260767a6d9ad34b61572d483579c21476c): 10,4W (lowest) to 13,4W (highest) While Libreboot performs much worse than Coreboot, Coreboot still eats around 3W extra when compared with the vendor BIOS. In other words: Coreboot consumes around 30-40% more juice than the vendor BIOS which is a very sad result for an ultraportable notebook. Is this a known issue? Has someone else tried the same and obtained different numbers? Cheers, Daniel

3 3

Re: [coreboot] Coreboot ARM
by Aaron Durbin 29 Apr '16

29 Apr '16

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 5:55 AM, daoud yessine <yessine.daoud.92(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > How bootblock can relocate CBFS to load romstage in ARM SOCs ? > the same thing for romstage to load ramstage and ramstage to load payload ? > what's the name of structure or pointer to refer to it to relocate CBFS ? > Because coreboot is different from an ARM soc to another in firmware level. > > What do you mean relocate? Relocate the loaded program at runtime? There is a relocatable module support in coreboot for doing this, but many of the ARM platforms statically link all the stages in payload. Ensuring that they don't overlap is done manually for all the components. > thx > ᐧ > > -- > coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org > https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot >

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Microcode problem with Braswell CPU
by Alexander Böcken 29 Apr '16

29 Apr '16

Hello Zoran, read_microcode_rev() returns 0, msr.lo is 0xFFE68430, msr.hi is 0 These values are all good, as far as I can tell. However, I had to dump these as post codes, because printk is not available in this early stage in bootblock.

2 1

Coreboot ARM
by daoud yessine 29 Apr '16

29 Apr '16

Hi How bootblock can relocate CBFS to load romstage in ARM SOCs ? the same thing for romstage to load ramstage and ramstage to load payload ? what's the name of structure or pointer to refer to it to relocate CBFS ? Because coreboot is different from an ARM soc to another in firmware level. thx ᐧ

1 0

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot April 2016